Jason Krupp at Stuff reports:

Greenpeace New Zealand, which made headlines by illegally occupying oil drilling rigs, has opened a new front against the National-led Government – the economy.

Today, the environmental lobby group will make public a 30-page report, The Future is Here, outlining the economic gains within New Zealand’s reach if it begins transforming its oil-based economy to a green one. …

The think tank modelled what would happen if the country produced 100 per cent of its electricity from renewable sources by 2025, and was fully reliant on renewables for all its energy needs by 2050.

The headline figures suggest New Zealand could be oil free in 22 years, save $7 billion a year in oil imports by 2035, and create 27,000 jobs in the bio-energy sector. It would also reduce the country’s greenhouse gas emissions by 94 per cent on 2009 levels.

So what would this all cost?

Where the report stumbles is on the financial side, giving no detail on the level of investment required or the economic tradeoffs, making it impossible to judge if the transformation would be worthwhile or simply a pyrrhic environmental victory.

An economic report that doesn’t even detail the cost isn’t worth the recycled paper it is printed on.

Argent said this was a deliberate choice, with the aim of the report to spark a discussion rather than getting too bogged down in the numbers.

Oh yes, let’s avoid minor details such as cost. I mean you can just print more money – right?

Reuters reports at Stuff:

Cameron’s political future and historic legacy are on the line. He has pledged to contest the next British general election in 2015 and his own Conservative party would never forgive him if he presided over the break-up of a United Kingdom comprising England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.

On the contrary many Conservatives would love Scotland to leave the UK.

In 2010 The Conservatives got 1 seat out of 59 in Scotland. With Scotland they were 306 out of 650 – a minority. Without it they would be 305 out of 591 – a majority.

In October 1974 the Conservatives got 16 out of 71 in Scotland and Labour got 41. With Scotland Labour won on 319 out of 635. Without Scotland Labour would not have had a majority and the Conservatives may have been able to govern.

In February 1974 the Conservatives got 297 seats, Labour 301 out of 635. Without Scotland it would have been Conservatives 276, Labour 261 out of 564. The Conservatives would have been given first chance to govern.

In 1964 the Conservatives got 304 seats, Labour 317 out of 630. Without Scotland it would have been Conservatives 281, Labour 273 out of 559 and a Conservative Government.

Opinion polls suggest support for independence has stalled. The latest put it at 32 per cent and opposition at 47 per cent. But Cameron and politicians from other parties remain nervous.

If the economy was stronger, independence would have a better chance. But people want security when times are tough. Hence a change is unlikely.

Some Scottish friends have suggested to me the eventual shape of the UK will be as a Federation of four countries.

A reader writes in:

I thought I’d share my experience with minimum wage, or lack of.

Earlier last year I hired a fresh graduate student – she was at the time my first hire for the new company. Her starting salary was less than 20k, an amount that would be tough (but manageable) to live off. It may seem rough considering Singapore is one of the more expensive cities in the world but she lives with her parents. I was simply unwilling/unable to pay any higher as I was starting a business however she was happy to get a job and to prove herself.

She has since proved her worth and has been a relief to my workload enabling me to focus on getting new business. Her first salary increase was after six months, she got 25%. Her second review is coming up shortly, it marks one year since she started and she is being raised to double her starting salary. Not bad for someone just one year out of uni.

 Another example – I recently hired a virtual assistant through Odesk. It was a take it or leave it proposition, I thought it could be helpful but not essential. 

There were a lot of offers from $1 an hour through to $40 an hour.

One applicant I liked, from the Philippines, offered to do the work for $3.50 which I felt was ridiculously low and unfair. I spoke to her several times on Skype and I raised my point to which she had this to say.

“Sir, if I work at local company I maybe get $1 an hour, these are long and hard jobs and I have young children. If I do this job I get more money but I can stay at home to care for my children at the same time.”

She then pointed out that many Filipinos leave their families and move overseas to work as maids and are extremely happy when they get jobs paying $400 SGD a month and here I was offering a job that paid more for her to stay at home with her family.

Long story short I hired her and she has been amazing. She is also loving her diverse role and the new skills she is learning – I have her doing anything I can think of from building databases, researching assignments, uploading for websites through to basic accounts and emailing for me.

And yes, I did ask her to stop calling me Sir.

 I realise these examples are not applicable to NZ directly however they do highlight two situations where a minimum wage would been worse off for both me and the employees. 

The minimum wage is one of those classic trade-offs. It is good for those in low paid jobs, who get more income. But it can be bad for those seeking a job. If you have a minimum wage, the challenge is setting it at a level that doesn’t drive too many people out of jobs.

Whale blogs:

Then I was emailed by a reader who heard Katie Bradford-Crozier talking to Justin duFresne this morning on NewstalkZB. She said that int he leadership vote there were 10 abstentions.

This confirms what I have heard too from my Labour sources. Ten abstentions. 

Ten from a caucus of 34…nearly a third of the caucus abstained from voting. The actual percentage is 29% of David Shearer’s caucus refused to vote for him.

If correct, this means only 24 MPs voted for Shearer and the survival threshold was 21 MPs. Far from over-whelming.

Everyone in Labour knows Grant Robertson will become the next Leader. The only question is when.

Will Tanner writes:

Sweden’s financial crisis struck in 1991: the product of a now familiar cocktail of housing bubble, credit crunch and anti-competitive regulation. High taxes and productivity decline foretold years of low or negative growth: GDP fell by 4 per cent between 1990 and 1993.

So what did they do?

Swedish reformers used this fiscal crisis to radically reform the state. A centre-right coalition opened up the universal welfare state to choice and competition, using private companies and people power to improve quality and efficiency. State funding for education was reformed to follow the pupil, rather than the service, meaning that schools had to compete for custom for the first time. In healthcare, the private sector was invited to set up hospitals, GP clinics and even ambulances.

Sounds excellent. What happened?

Competition has delivered better services. At Kunskapsskolan, a private free school chain, children take greater responsibility for their own learning; setting their own goals, class schedules and recording progress online. The 10,000 pupils taught in its 33 schools consistently outperform the national average. Private healthcare companies have helped the Swedish healthcare system keep up with rapid change. St Göran hospital in Stockholm has been outsourced to a private company, Capio. Since 1999, St Göran has grown its market share, improved clinical care and patient satisfaction, and saved millions.

Oh that will send shudders to some. A private hospital with growing market share. I’m more interested in the improved clinical care and patient satisfaction.

One of the most important achievements in Sweden has been bringing workers on side. While outsourcing is still controversial, once-obstructionist unions have been persuaded that competition drives up wages and improves working conditions for members. They now largely support the reforms. In 2001, a major report by the powerful Municipal Workers’ Union went so far as to say that “competition between the various providers can promote and promulgate improvements in both productivity and quality”.

Sigh – what I would give for some Swedish unions.

As a result, Sweden now enjoys budget surpluses of up to 3 per cent of GDP a year. Meanwhile, since public sector reform improves economic performance by raising productivity, the Swedish economy continues to grow. 

That is my idea of the Scandinavian dream. Well that, plus Princess Madeleine.

Human Rights Watch have said:

The Kremlin in 2012 unleashed the worst political crackdown in Russia’s post-Soviet history, Human Rights Watch said today in itsWorld Report 2013. The authorities introduced a series of restrictive laws, harassed and intimidated activists, and interfered in the work of nongovernmental organizations, crushing hopes for reform following the winter 2011 mass protests.

“This has been the worst year for human rights in Russia in recent memory,” said Hugh Williamson, Europe and Central Asia director at Human Rights Watch. “Russia’s civil society is standing strong but with the space around it shrinking rapidly, it needs support now more than ever.”

In its 665-page report, Human Rights Watch assessed progress on human rights during the past year in more than 90 countries, including an analysis of the aftermath of the Arab Spring. The willingness of new governments to respect rights will determine whether the Arab Spring gives birth to genuine democracy or simply spawns authoritarianism in new clothes, Human Rights Watch said.

In Russia, since Vladimir Putin’s return to the presidency in May, a parliament dominated by members of the pro-Putin United Russia party has adopted a series of laws that imposed dramatic new restrictions on civil society. A June law introduced limits on public assembliesand raised relevant financial sanctions to the level of criminal fines, re-criminalized libel, and imposed new restrictions on internet content.

Russia isn’t going to turn back into the USSR, but it is clear that the path it is on is one of authoritarianism and towards totalitarian.  It may not have the reach the old USSR had, but its veto on the UN Security Council means it helps makes the world a worse place.

Lockwood Smith will give his valedictory speech this week. I’ve already blogged several times on Lockwood’s contribution to Parliament, and will cover his valedictory.

It is timely to recognise that this also sees the retirement of Beryl Bright, who has worked for Lockwood for over 25 years.

Many staff work for an MP for a couple of years only. To work for one MP for over half your working life is a huge commitment. You become essential to them, and effectively part of their family.

Those who stay with an MP for the long haul, often have their own ups and downs which coincide with the MP. If your MP is a Minister and there is a change of Government, you go from being a Senior Private Secretary managing an office of a dozen people to a sole executive secretary.

I recall in 1999 when this happened, Parliamentary Service added insult to injury by initially saying that someone who had been an SPS for nine years had to come in at the bottom of the salary scale for executive secretaries as their ministerial experience was deemed to be with a different employer! Common sense eventually prevailed.

An experienced staff member makes a huge difference to an MPs effectiveness. They don’t just run their office and diary. They act as eyes and ears and protect them whenever they can.

I think my first experience with Beryl was in 1991 when I was organising the Young Nats policy conference we wanted Lockwood as Education Minister to attend. It was at National Park in Mt Ruapehu. Beryl politely but firmly pointed out to us that what we were asking was for an extremely busy Minister to get up at 5 am, drive an hour and a half to an airport, then fly to Auckland, then fly to Taupo, then drive an hour or so to us, and then do the same in reverse. In other words he would be giving up his entire Saturday just to spend an hour with us. That was part of the job – making sure that we understood that while we were just getting him for an hour – his attendance was in fact a major undertaking for him. Lockwood was a great supporter of the Young Nats and turned up though pretty much every year without fail.

So if you are an aspiring MP, you should hope you manage to get a Beryl Bright to work for you. The difference it can make can not be under-stated.

The Maori Council has announced:

The Māori Council is delivering a public awareness programme for the Māori Electoral Option, through a contract with the Electoral Commission’s Enrolment Services, in a number of areas within New Zealand.

As a provider of this programme, the Māori Council is committed to giving Māori the information they need to make their own choice as to which type of electoral roll they wish to be on – the Māori roll or the General roll.

The Māori Electoral Option helps determine the number of Māori and General electorates there will be for the next two General Elections.

I have to say that I think choosing a body which is currently suing the Government in court to be involved in what is meant to be a neutral enrolment option exercise is very poor judgement. It doesn’t lend confidence to the neutrality of our electoral institutions.

Green leader Russell Norman tweeted:

Lord Turner, chair UK Financial Services Authority, defends financing Govt spending by ltd printing money. radical!http://ow.ly/1S6b0Q

Labour strategist Trevor Mallard replied:

@RusselNorman stop thrashing dead horse and work on imaginative tools appropriate for NZ

This will go down well at The Standard! Russel then responds:

@TrevorMallard you just go back to closing schools and making housing unaffordable like you did in govt

Points to Norman I say. He follows up with:

@TrevorMallard 2002-2007 house prices doubled, current account ballooned. Greens repeatedly told Labour to act, but you did nothing

This is like the Iran-Iraq war – you don’t know which side to cheer for!

UPDATE: it continues. Mallard says:

Presume this is an intern not@RusselNorman but whoever it is needs to look to future not focus on rear vision mirror

And we also have a very tetchy Labour MP in Clare Curran:

@jordantcarter @pointoforder that’s bullshit Jordan

Maybe they are all nervous about Shearer’s reshuffle?

Do a traceroute to 216.81.59.173

Very cool.

H/T: Simon Allard

I got sent a link to this video of Chris Finlayson as Attorney-General talking about his role in advising Parliament under Section 7 of the Bill of Rights Act if a proposed law is unjustifiably inconsistent with the Bill of Rights Act.

I thought at first it would be one for the policy wonks only, but I think many might enjoy his typically blunt appraisals. Chris also reveals that he doesn’t just submit whatever the Ministry of Justice or Crown Law says on a bill, but will often draft his own reports or majorly rewrite their drafts.

Some quotes:

• also (report) on a couple of members’ bill which are shockers like Holly Walker’s ridiculous lobby legislation which seems to breach almost every provision of the Bill of Rights
• How the disgraceful Foreshore & Seabed legislation avoided a Section 7 report beats me
• The Electoral Finance Bill, which was frankly a Stalinist piece of legislation introduced by Helen Clark in her third term to pay the National Party back for doing so well at the 2005 election, breached numerous provisions of the Bill of Rights yet it never received a Section 7 report.
• This is the 19th floor of Bowen House. As you can see I look down on all of my colleagues in the Beehive … Don’t put that in the film

Chris also said that if he thinks a proposed bill is likely to get an adverse Section 7 report, some of his colleagues will then work with him to amend the bill so that it avoids conflicting with the Bill of Right Act.

Quite a few things announced by Gillard and Key in Queenstown. They are:

• Joint action to address the high cost of mobile roaming rates between the two countries
  
• an $8 million trial of fast‑track automated border technology for trans-tasman travel
• Commencement of new retirement savings portability arrangements between Australia and New Zealand from 1 July 2013
• Entry into force of the CER Investment Protocol from 1 March 2013
• New Zealand has agreed to resettle 150 refugees who are subject to Australia’s offshore processing legislation, as part of their annual quota of 750 refugees
• NZ$3 million in matched funding over two years to support trans-Tasman collaboration to identify potential vaccines for rheumatic fever
• Investigate a possible reciprocal student debt recovery scheme.
• An A$5 million memorial will be erected in Wellington’s National War Memorial park precinct by the Australian Government

Damien Grant writes in the HoS:

David Shearer and his cohort of prospective coalition partners, the Greens, Mana and NZ First, are holding a show-trial into who killed the manufacturing industry.

Forty thousand manufacturing jobs have disappeared, Shearer declares.

What he does not say is those 40,000 jobs have gone since a peak right before the 2008 recession and almost half of that loss occurred in the final year of the last Labour government.

But if Shearer and his band of the grumpy and frumpy were to take the time to read the Department of Statistics September 2012 Economic Survey on Manufacturing, they would learn that total sales in the sector have been static.

Falling from a high of $24 billion in 2008, it is now sitting at $23 billion, measured in 2010 dollars.

The industry has become more productive; jobs have gone, but sales have not.

A good point.

Shearer is known to enjoy the surf, so he will understand it is best to ride the waves – not try to turn them back.

Manufacturing jobs that have gone are not coming back and there is nothing he, Graeme Wheeler or King Canute can do about it.

As well as his plan to build slums for the urban poor in areas where there will never be any employment – manufacturing or otherwise – he is granting a platform for the vested interests of the likes of the Manufacturers Association to cry about the exchange rate.

It is worth noting that the MEA represents relatively few manufacturers. Business NZ has a far higher proportion of manufacturers in their membership.

Manufacturing jobs have been killed because the economic tide has moved.

Shearer knows it, or should know it.

He may be king one day and if he is telling us he can control the tides of economic change, then he is going to look pretty silly on the beach after the next election.

Grant points out we also have fewer typists and lighthouse keepers than we used to!

Steve Kilgallon at Stuff reports:

Tamihere reckons it’s not what he says, but how he says it that gets him into trouble. He reckons people know he’s saying the right thing, “but they might be far more genteel or academic [how they say it]. I’m not”.

And so, in the course of an hour, he casually insults Helen Clark, most of Labour’s front bench, radio broadcaster Danny Watson, Bennett (again – still fat), TV3’s Tova O’Brien (again – still silly), former Waitakere mayor Bob Harvey, Wishart (scumbag), the Act Party (also scumbags), the Maori Party (incompetent), the unions (lazy), academics (timid), me (loser), and himself.

Classic Tamihere.

And, amid all that, for the first time, he announces he definitely wants to become a Labour MP again.

Oh excellent.

While the chance of a tilt at the “train wreck” Maori Party in the Tamaki Makaurau Maori seat appeals, it seems more likely Tamihere will persuade Labour Maori members to switch electoral rolls into the Waitakere seat, giving him enough clout to win selection and, he hopes, beat Bennett.

But against that will be the unions.

Parliament has announced:

Later in 2013 public hearings of evidence before select committees will be webcast live on this website. This will be part of a pilot to assess how this type of service could be delivered in the future. …

During the pilot, one select committee hearing will be webcast at a time. Webcasting will be able to occur only from certain select committee rooms, but committee rooms will continue to be allocated on the basis of committees’ needs; this will not involve any judgment about the newsworthiness of committee business. A committee intending to hear evidence in public and allocated a room with webcasting facilities will be able to choose whether those hearings are webcast.

I’m pleased to see this initiative. Select Committees are an important part of Parliament and this should allow more people to see what happens at them.

Hopefully eventually we’ll see all select committees available for viewing over the Internet, and also archived for future reference.

Pat Pilcher writes:

For technology to become a fully functioning cog in NZ’s economy, the way we treat intellectual property (e.g. the ideas and concepts behind the software, hardware and other innovation that underpins much of the tech sector) is critically important. In a nutshell, we’d better get our patent laws right or we may find local businesses involved in unwinnable patent fights against lawyered-up multinationals when they could be innovating, exporting and otherwise creating wealth for New Zealanders.

And the patent trolls.

The overarching aim is for the government to provide a balance between innovation and protecting public interests.

Achieving this is no easy feat, and already the bill is mired in controversy as Commerce Minister Craig Foss changed the wording of a clause within the bill which could have huge ramifications for New Zealand’s fledgling software industry.

His amendment has changed some crucial wording in the bill that some say has the government moving away from excluding software from being patented (as per select committee recommendations), to parts of the bill being sufficiently vague that software may indeed become patentable. Clause 10a of the supplementary order paper 120 was amended to read: “..prevents anything from being an invention for the purposes of this Act only to the extent that a patent or an application relates to a computer program as such”

It might only be two words, but from a legal standpoint the addition of “as such” makes all the difference and could see kiwi companies being locked into protracted legal battles against multinationals whose lawyers are likely to emerge as the only real victors, whilst New Zealand could end up on the losing side.

I’m not sure how significant the two extra words are but personally prefer to err on the side of caution and leave them out.

Of equal concern, changes to the bill could see businesses that had invested in New Zealand pulling out. Geomechanica, a Canadian software company had planned to relocate to NZ because they felt that the original patent ban on software as proposed in the unmodified form of the bill would foster an innovation friendly environment. Sadly tweaks made to the patent bill could render a New Zealand business case untenable for them and others, depriving New Zealand of employment opportunities, potentially setting our digital economy back by decades.

According to AJ Guillon, co-founder of Geomechanica, “We have planned our products and marketing based on a relocation to New Zealand, exporting innovative software without the threat of domestic software patents. If the software patent bill passes with the “as such” wording, we cannot justify a relocation to a country with an ambiguous law on a matter that is so important to us.”

Seems like a good case for a clear law that is explicit that software can not be patented.

The latest Nielsen data is here. Major papers are:

• NZ Herald 531,000 (-39,000, -8% drop in last year)
• Waikato Times 96,000 (+2,000, +1%)
• Dominion Post 235,000 (+3,000, +1%)
• The Press 215,000 (-18,000, -9%)
• ODT 96,000 (-9,000, -10%)

That’s some huge drops for the Herald, Press and ODT. The Herald has dropped 68,000 in the last two years.

Weeklies:

• Sunday News 220,000 (-39,000, -16%)
• SST 432,000 (-105,000, -21%)
• HoS 362,000 (-20,000, -6%)
• NBR 53,000 (-5,000, -11%)

Look at the drop for the SST. That is like an arterial blood loss.

The weekly quiz is here. Guessed one.

The Herald reports:

The lowest price of broadband internet access is less important than ensuring consumers move as quickly as possible to high-speed fibre-based services, says Telecommunications Minister Amy Adams.

I disagree. I’m a huge fan of the fibre roll-out but you don’t force people onto fibre by artificially keeping the cost of copper high.

“I don’t think the over-arching criteria in this is ‘what is the cheapest option’,” Adams told BusinessDesk. “If that was the case, we’d be sticking with dial-up. I don’t think you’d find any consumer saying ‘if dial-up’s cheaper, let me have that’.”

I don’t accept that comparison. The difference between dial-up and broadband is massive. My laptop effectively freezes on dialup. The difference between dial-up and DSL is like the difference between a wheelchair and a car. While the difference between DSL and fibre is more like the difference between a Lada and a Porsche. And for some people a Lada is fine.

Her comments followed her announcement the government would accelerate its timetable for reviewing the regulatory regime for telecommunications services. The decision effectively neuters the Commerce Commission, which issued a draft determination late last year that could favour a longer life for the existing copper wire network by pricing it highly competitively with new fibre services.

That draft determination, which Adams described as a “curve ball”, sparked protest from the key players in the ultra-fast broadband roll-out, including NZX-listed Chorus, whose share price recovered 12 per cent today, immediately following Adams’s announcement.

I think it is disappointing that the Government has intervened in this way. The Commerce Commission is doing the job set down by statute. If it has made an error, then that can be challenged in the submissions on the draft and if need be in court. I’ve not see any suggestion the Commission has got the law wrong.

“Carrying on the way it was would have changed the landscape in the way telecommunications services were priced and delivered and we saw some real risks around that in terms of market uncertainty and the market not looking to develop and promote high speed fibre products,” said Adams.

I think the market works better when the Government doesn’t artificially push the price of one product up.

“What became very clear is that this sort of uncertainty and decisions coming out that have really taken everyone by surprise are the last thing that anyone needs in this space.

Not at all. I am not surprised that the Commission found out copper services were over-priced.

Again got sent the link by the persons or persons responsible for the A Bit Shit page. I have no idea at all who they are, but the appear to be disgruntled left-wingers.

Alex Fensome at Stuff reports:

Film giant Warner Brothers has told the Government it will jeopardise future film investment if it releases “sensitive information” about the deal to keep production of The Hobbit in New Zealand.

Ombudsman David McGee has ordered the release of 18 previously withheld Government documents about the 2010 deal.

They include emails between Warner Bros’ New Line studio, Sir Peter Jackson’s Wingnut Films and the Government about the union dispute that threatened to take production offshore.

The Government, which had refused to release the documents, can now prevent their publication only by issuing an order in council, signed by the governor-general. Such a power has never been used.

It is not unusual for an information release to go to the Ombudsman for a ruling. As far as I am aware the Government has not indicated in any way that it would over-rule the Ombudsman. But it goes without saying, that of course they should not.

In Mr McGee’s ruling, New Line warns that, “if the Government is not willing to adequately protect this sensitive information from disclosure, this will operate as a major disincentive to motion picture studios as well as local and foreign talent to utilise New Zealand as a location for future productions”.

It said the documents reflected “negotiations and innermost thinking, including certain strategic decisions, legal and personal opinions, offers from third-party governments and other private information”. If made public, the information would damage New Line’s business relationships and impair its ability to negotiate with unions and third parties, it said.

There are a number of grounds on which information can be with-held. The Ombudsman is the authority that decides on if the information qualifies. He has decided it does not. Companies should know when corresponding with Government that pretty much anything they say is likely to be made public unless it qualifies to be with-held.

Prime Minister John Key said the Government was “quite relaxed” about releasing the paperwork and he expected it to happen.

It had not released the information in the previous two years because of commercial negotiations during the filming of the movies.

While he acknowledged that Warner Bros and Wingnut did not want the information released, he said it was unlikely the Government would use its veto powers.

Good.

Stuff reports:

Nothing about homeless man Lindsay Evans shouts money.

Everything from the worn clothes to the grime screams tramp, and there’s the down-and-out expression of a man with nowhere to go and nothing to do but hope for something better.

Yet as the 53-year-old sucks hungrily at another freshly rolled Bali Shag cigarette in Garden Place, the Hamilton man says his savings add up to $76,200.

Homeless, but can afford to smoke.

For dinner the previous evening Mr Evans ate half a packet of $2.59 Home Brand pretzels. For breakfast, he ate the other half.

How much do cigarettes cost?

Now he can’t wait to get back into employment, as long as it’s the right work, and get a roof over his head.

In the past three years he has applied for more than 800 jobs and hasn’t had a single interview.

Not sure he can afford to be so choosy. But why no jobs?

It’s a grim, boring life, he says. Miserable even. He once went without a shower for seven months – not a big deal.

Could be a good idea, if he does get an interview.

First there’s breakfast, closely followed by one of up to 20 cups of the cheHomeapest instant coffee available.

20 cups a day?